Curious has been placed on probation

Violators of the rules are listed here

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 20516
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 337 times
Contact:

Curious has been placed on probation

Post #1

Post by otseng »

Curious has been place on probation for the following post:

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 497#115497
Curious wrote:
otseng wrote:
Curious wrote:
otseng wrote:
Curious wrote:I have already given more than enough information for someone of average intelligence to begin the search. You are either an idiot, bone idle, or a time waster. I cannot be bothered with any of the aforementioned. Goodbye, and goodluck.
Moderator note: It is a violation of the rules to attack another poster. Please review the rules and abide by them.
I did not attack another poster. I made the valid observation that the poster belonged to a particular group. I quite reasonably assumed Mculloch is either an idiot, bone idle or a time waster. He wastes his time pontificating when he would be better served spending time studying the subject to be able to speak with authority on the subject. If, on the other hand, he has gone crying to you, I could assume he is both idiotic and bone idle.
This will be your final formal warning. Any further rule violations will result in disciplinary actions. Also, note that publicly challenging a moderator action is itself against the rules:

13. Appeals and challenges to decisions made by moderators should not be made in public. The proper channel is to send a PM to a moderator and to discuss it directly and in private.

You are free to PM me privately. But the next action by a moderator will result in probation.
If Mculloch HAD gone crying to you I could understand this response. If he had not, then this response would seem unreasonable, as Mculloch could be reasonably seen as being uneducated in the subject (as I said). I do find it remarkable though that you find "no greater worth" in the Bible's message than does the casual peruser.
My point is "Don't say the Bible doesn't say X unless you can show why it doesn't say X".
I gave a reason and a means of validation of my claim. I find it implausible that anyone would even attempt to refute this claim without knowledge of the subject. I could assume, quite reasonably, that any such detractor be an idiot, bone idle, or a time waster. I also could rightly assume that anyone who restricts my right to say such is an obscurer.
1000 token fine imposed.

Post Reply